commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ceki Gülcü <>
Subject Re: [logging] Enterprise Common Logging... dare we say 2.0?
Date Tue, 21 Dec 2004 20:24:38 GMT
At 07:51 PM 12/21/2004, robert burrell donkin wrote:

>now it's getting political :(

Your comments about the "optionality" of consultations elicited my
political response.

Many  ASF  members   were  involved  with  Apache  at   one  point  or
another. Moreover,  Jakarta has quite  a few influential, I  dare say,
very influential, members.  Thus, it is not easy to emphasize with the
sense  of  victimization  shared   by  some  Jakarta  committers.   If
proportionally  too few Jakarta  committers are  ASF members,  which I
honestly  doubt to  be  the  case, what  is  keeping existing  Jakarta
members from increasing their own representation?

>matters of scope are less important than matters of community. if strong 
>community backing emerges  then the scope issues can easily be solved. if 
>no community emerges then matters of scope will become irrelevant.

It all depends  on how you define community. By  community do you mean
Jakarta Commons,  Jakarta or the rest of  the ASF?

>- robert

Ceki Gülcü

   The complete log4j manual:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message